SATBIR SAGWAL,KARNAL vs. PRCIT, KARNAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3977/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 November 2020AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits rather than dismissing it for non-prosecution. The case was restored to the CIT(A) to provide one final opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 1,05,00,880/- to the assessee's income. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) despite multiple opportunities, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution without deciding on merits, and the proper procedure for handling non-appearance of the assessee before the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : G : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr.DR
Hearing: 18.11.2020Pronounced: 18.11.2020

ORDER

PER R.K. PANDA, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.11.2018 of the CIT(A), Karnal, relating to assessment year 2011-12.

2.

The assessee in his various grounds of appeal has challenged the ex parte order of the CIT(A) in sustaining the various additions made by the AO.

3.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the AO, in the order passed u/s 143(3)/263, determined the income of the assessee at Rs.1,08,67,030/- and agricultural income at Rs.1,23,000/- as against the income determined u/s 143(3) at Rs.3,66,230/- wherein he made addition of Rs.1,05,00,880/-. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) despite number of opportunities granted, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution.

4.

Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

5.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the materials available on record. We find, despite number of opportunities granted by the ld.CIT(A), the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) to substantiate its case for which the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. However, he has not decided the appeal on merit which he is required to do instead of dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) and substantiate its case, failing which the ld.CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly.

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →